INTERNATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL LAW: CASES ...Preface to Second Edition We take pleasure to offer this Casebook on International Environmental Law as a classroom learning tool that can

INTERNATIONALENVIRONMENTAL LAW:

CASES, MATERIALS, ANDPROBLEMS

Second Edition

LexisNexis Law School PublishingAdvisory Board

Paul Caron

Professor of LawPepperdine University School of LawHerzog Summer Visiting Professor in TaxationUniversity of San Diego School of Law

Bridgette Carr

Clinical Professor of LawUniversity of Michigan Law School

Olympia Duhart

Professor of Law and Director of Lawyering Skills & Values ProgramNova Southeastern University, Shepard Broad Law School

Samuel Estreicher

Dwight D. Opperman Professor of LawDirector, Center for Labor and Employment LawNYU School of Law

Steven I. Friedland

Professor of Law and Senior ScholarElon University School of Law

Carole Goldberg

Jonathan D. Varat Distinguished Professor of LawUCLA School of Law

Oliver Goodenough

Professor of LawVermont Law School

Paul Marcus

Haynes Professor of LawWilliam and Mary Law School

John Sprankling

Distinguished Professor of LawMcGeorge School of Law

INTERNATIONALENVIRONMENTAL LAW:CASES, MATERIALS, ANDPROBLEMS

Second Edition

Thomas J. SchoenbaumHarold S. Shefelman Distinguished Professor of Law, University of Washington

Michael K. YoungPresident and Professor of Law, University of Washington

ISBN: 978-1-4224-7029-9Looseleaf ISBN: 978-1-4224-8150-9eBook ISBN: 978-0-3271-7827-9

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

Schoenbaum, Thomas J., author.International environmental law : cases, materials, and problems / Thomas J. Schoenbaum, Harold S. ShefelmanDistinguished Professor of Law, University of Washington, Michael K. Young, President and Professor of Law,University of Washington. -- Second edition.p. cm.ISBN 978-1-4224-7029-9 (hardbound)1. Environmental law, International--Cases. I. Young, Michael K., 1949- author. II. Title.K3585.S365 2014344.04’6--dc23

2014035063

This publication is designed to provide authoritative information in regard to the subject matter covered. It is soldwith the understanding that the publisher is not engaged in rendering legal, accounting, or other professionalservices. If legal advice or other expert assistance is required, the services of a competent professional shouldbe sought.

LexisNexis and the Knowledge Burst logo are registered trademarks of Reed Elsevier Properties Inc., used underlicense. Matthew Bender and the Matthew Bender Flame Design are registered trademarks of Matthew BenderProperties Inc.

Copyright © 2014 Matthew Bender & Company, Inc., a member of LexisNexis. All Rights Reserved.

No copyright is claimed by LexisNexis or Matthew Bender & Company, Inc., in the text of statutes, regulations,and excerpts from court opinions quoted within this work. Permission to copy material may be licensed for a feefrom the Copyright Clearance Center, 222 Rosewood Drive, Danvers, Mass. 01923, telephone (978) 750-8400.

NOTE TO USERSTo ensure that you are using the latest materials available in this area, please besure to periodically check the LexisNexis Law School web site for downloadableupdates and supplements at www.lexisnexis.com/lawschool.

Editorial Offices121 Chanlon Rd., New Providence, NJ 07974 (908) 464-6800201 Mission St., San Francisco, CA 94105-1831 (415) 908-3200www.lexisnexis.com

(2014–Pub.3066)

Preface to Second EditionWe take pleasure to offer this Casebook on International Environmental Law as a

classroom learning tool that can be covered in the confines of a three-hour course on thesubject. We have assembled these materials with the idea that the book should not be ascholarly work that is encyclopedic in scope but rather should be as practical andcompact as possible. To this end, we put a premium on brevity and have included onlybasic primary materials and notes in the book. We think it is very important for thestudents to be familiar with more extensive primary materials as well so we arepublishing a Document Supplement as a separate volume. The documents in theDocument Supplement are keyed to each of the 10 chapters in the Casebook so thestudent can read and refer to the documents necessary to understand each topic as he orshe is covering the substantive book chapter.

We have carefully ordered the Chapters in the Casebook so the student will acquire thebackground necessary to understand each subsequent topic in turn. We also presume thestudent will have no background in either Public International Law or EnvironmentalLaw; thus, we include some materials on these topics as well. Of course, it would helpunderstanding if the student has some background in one or both of those two importantsubjects.

We believe the problem method is a good teaching technique, so we include problemsin each Chapter that are designed to stimulate class discussion and understanding. But theprofessor of course may want to skip some (or all) of the problems or substitute his or herown problems for ours. Thus we offer the problems as optional tools to be covered or notas the professor who is in charge of the course decides is appropriate.

This work is obviously designed as a teaching tool. We have accordingly largelyexcluded secondary materials from the published work. Of course there are manyimportant and stimulating secondary works that we hope the students consult during thecourse of studying the subject. To this end at the beginning of the book we provideSuggestions for Further Reading which cite both general works on InternationalEnvironmental Law and works that are keyed to each of the 10 Chapters of the book.

Although this work is dubbed “second edition,” it is in reality a wholly new start,differing greatly from the first edition. Although three of the co-authors of the firstedition, Don Anton, Jon Charney, and Philippe Sands, for various reasons could notparticipate in doing this edition, the authors are grateful for their ideas and valuable priorcontributions, and wish to express our deep thanks and admiration for their work in thisfield.

We always appreciate hearing from and having suggestions from colleagues.

Thomas J. Schoenbaum, email: [email protected]

Michael K. Young, email: [email protected]

Seattle, Washington

November 18, 2013

iii

Suggestions for Further Reading inInternational Environmental Law*

Although International Environmental Law is a relatively new field, many outstandingbooks and articles have appeared on every subject of the field. The scholarship in thisarea is outstanding but voluminous. In this memorandum, we are confined for practicalreasons to listing selected books and articles that we think will be helpful to studentsseeking additional sources of information.

General Works

To begin with, we think highly of many of the books that cover the entire field ofInternational Environmental Law. We recommend especially the following:

Birnie, Patricia, Alan Boyle, and Catherine Redgwell, International Law and theEnvironment, 3d ed. (Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press, 2009).

Bodansky, Daniel, Jutta Brunee, and Ellen Hey, eds., The Oxford Handbook ofInternational Environmental Law (Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press, 2007).

Kiss, Alexander and Dinah Shelton, International Environmental Law (Leiden andBoston: Martinus Nijhoff, 2007).

Sands, Philippe and Jacqueline Peel, Principles of International Environmental Law, 3ded. (New York: Cambridge Univ. Press, 2012).

Chapter 1: Introduction and Background

Adams, Todd B., Is There a Legal Future for Sustainable Development in GlobalWarming? Justice, Economics, and Protecting the Environment, 16 GEO. INT’L

ENVTL. L. REV. 77 (2003).

Adelman, David E., The Art of the Unsolvable: Locating the Vital Center of Science forEnvironmental Law & Policy, 37 ENVTL. L. 925 (2007).

Benedickson, Jaime, et al., eds., Environmental Law and Sustainability After Rio(Northampton, MA: Edward Elger Publishing, Inc., 2011).

Beyerlin, Ulrich and Thilo Marauhn, International Environmental Law (Portland, OR:Hart Publishing, 2011).

Blodgett, Mark S., Richard J. Hunter, Jr., and Hector R. Lozada, A Primer onInternational Environmental Law: Sustainability as a Principle of InternationalLaw and Custom, 15 ILSA J. INT’L & COMP. L. 15 (2008).

Bratspies, Rebecca M., Rethinking Decisionmaking in International EnvironmentalLaw: A Process-Oriented Inquiry into Sustainable Development, 32 YALE J. INT’L

L. 363 (2007).

Dernbach, John C., Creating the Law of Environmentally Sustainable EconomicDevelopment, 28 PACE ENVTL. L. REV. 614 (2011).

Dernbach, John C., Targets, Timetables, and Effective Implementing Mechanisms:Necessary Building Blocks for Sustainable Development, 27 WM. & MARY

ENVTL. L. & POL’Y REV. 79 (2002).

* The authors would like to thank Jessica L. Montgomery and Craig Henson, JD, 2013, for theirresearch help preparing these materials.

v

Desai, Bharat H., Institutionalizing International Environmental Law (Ardsley, NY:Transnational Publishers, Inc., 2004).

Drumbl, Mark A., Poverty, Wealth, and Obligation in International EnvironmentalLaw, 76 TUL. L. REV. 843 (2002).

Esty, Daniel C., Breaking the Environmental Law Logjam: The International Dimen-sion, 17 N.Y.U. ENVTL. L.J. 836 (2008).

Kotzé, Louis J., Global Environmental Governance: Law and Regulation for the 21stCentury. Northampton (MA: Edward Elgar Publishing, Inc., 2012).

Marong, Alhaji B.M., From Rio to Johannesburg: Reflections on the Role ofInternational Legal Norms in Sustainable Development, 16 GEO. INT’L ENVT’L. L.REV. 21 (2003).

Ørebech, Peter, et al., The Role of Customary Law in Sustainable Development (NewYork: Cambridge Univ. Press, 2005).

Rao, P.K., International Environmental Law and Economics (Malden, MA: BlackwellPublishers Inc., 2002).

Stark, Barbara, Sustainable Development and Postmodern International Law: GreenerGlobalization?, 27 WM. & MARY ENVTL. L. & POL’Y REV. 137 (2002).

Yang, Tseming and Robert V. Percival, The Emergence of Global Environmental Law,36 ECOLOGY L.Q. 615 (2009).

Chapter 2: General International Environmental Law

Abate, Randall S., Dawn of a New Era in the Extraterritorial Application of U.S.Environmental Statutes: A Proposal for an Integrated Judicial Standard Based onthe Continuum of Context, 31 COLUM. J. ENVTL. L. 87 (2006).

Applegate, John S., The Taming of the Precautionary Principle, 27 WM. & MARY

ENVTL. L. & POL’Y REV. 13 (2002).

Bodansky, Daniel, Is There an International Environmental Constitution?, 16 IND. J.GLOBAL LEGAL STUD. 565 (2009).

Bruch, Carl, Is International Environmental Law Really Law?: An Analysis ofApplication in Domestic Courts, 23 PACE ENVTL. L. REV. 423 (2006).

Churchill, Robert R. and Geir Ulfstein, Autonomous Institutional Arrangements inMultilateral Environmental Agreements: A Little-Noticed Phenomenon in Inter-national Law, 94 AM. JUR. INT’L L. 623 (2000).

Driesen, David M., Thirty Years of International Environmental Law: A Retrospectiveand Plea for Reinvigoration, 30 SYRACUSE J. INT’L L. & COM. 353 (2003).

Dycus, Stephen, Nuclear War: Still the Greatest Threat to the Environment, 25 VT. L.REV 753 (2001).

Ehrmann, Markus, Procedures of Compliance Control in International EnvironmentalTreaties, 13 COLO. J. INT’L ENVTL. L. & POL’Y 377 (2002).

Farber, Daniel A., Probabilities Behaving Badly: Complexity Theory and Environmen-tal Uncertainty, 37 U.C. DAVIS L. REV. 145 (2003).

Fitzmaurice, Malgosia, Contemporary Issues in International Environmental Law(Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar Publishing, Inc., 2009).

Foster, Caroline E., Science and the Precautionary Principle in International Courtsand Tribunals: Expert Evidence, Burden of Proof and Finality (New York:Cambridge Univ. Press, 2011).

Suggestions for Further Reading

vi

Gray, Kevin R., International Environmental Impact Assessment: Potential for aMultilateral Environmental Agreement, 11 COLO. J. INT’L. ENVT’L. L. & POL’Y 83(2000).

Gillroy, John Martin, Adjudication Norms, Dispute Settlement Regimes and Interna-tional Tribunals: The Status of “Environmental Sustainability” in InternationalJurisprudence, 42 STAN. J. INT’L L. 1 (2006).

Kalas, Peggy Rodgers, International Environmental Dispute Resolution and the Needfor Access by Non-State Entities, 12 COLO. J. INT’L ENVT’L. L. & POL’Y 191(2001).

Kerbrat, Yann, and Sandrine Maljeau-Dubois, eds., The Transformation of Interna-tional Environmental Law (Portland, OR: Hart Publishing, 2011).

Lin, Albert C., The Unifying Role of Harm in Environmental Law, 2006 WIS. L. REV.897.

Mayer, Don, The Precautionary Principle and International Efforts to Ban DDT, 9 S.C.ENVT’L. L.J. 135 (2002).

Nash, Jonathan Remy, Too Much Market? Conflict Between Tradable PollutionAllowances and the “Polluter Pays” Principle, 24 HARV. ENVTL. L. REV. 465(2000).

Onzivu, William, International Environmental Law, the Public’s Health, and DomesticEnvironmental Governance in Developing Countries, 21 AM. U. INT’L L. REV.597 (2006).

Percival, Robert V., Who’s Afraid of the Precautionary Principle?, 23 PACE ENVTL. L.REV. 21 (2006).

Rinceanu, Johanna, Enforcement Mechanisms in International Environmental Law:Quo Vandunt? Homo Sanus in Natura Sana, 15 J. ENVTL. L. & LITIG. 147 (2000).

Voigt, Christina, Sustainable Development as a Principle of International Environmen-tal Law: Resolving Conflicts between Climate Measures and WTO Law (Boston,MA: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, 2009).

Chapter 3: State Responsibility for Transboundary Environmental Harm

Buhi, Jason and Lin Feng, The International Joint Commission’s Role in the UnitedStates-Canada Transboundary Air Pollution Control Regime: A Century ofExperience to Guide the Future, 11 VT. J. ENVTL. L. 107 (2009).

Cassar, Angela Z. & Carl E. Bruch, Transboundary Environmental Impact Assessmentin International Watercourse Management, 12 N.Y.U. ENVTL. L.J. 169 (2003).

Dornbos, Jeffrey S., All (Water) Politics Is Local: A Proposal for Resolving Trans-boundary Water Disputes, 22 FORDHAM ENVTL. L. REV. 1 (2010).

George, Gerald F., Environmental Enforcement Across National Borders, 21 NAT.RESOURCES & ENV’T 3 (2006).

Guruswamy, Lakshman, State Responsibility in Promoting Environmental CorporateAccountability, 21 FORDHAM ENVTL. L. REV. 209 (2010).

Hall, Noah D., Transboundary Pollution: Harmonizing International and DomesticLaw, 40 U. MICH. J. L. REFORM 681 (2007).

Hess, Gerald F., The Trail Smelter, the Columbia River, and the ExtraterritorialApplication of CERCLA, 18 GEO. INT’L ENVTL. L. REV 1 (2005).

Hsu, Shi-Ling and Austen L. Parrish, Litigating Canada-U.S. Transboundary Harm:


vii

International Environmental Lawmaking and the Threat of Extraterritorial Reci-procity, 38 VA. J. INT’L L. 1 (2007).

Kelly, Ryan P. and Margaret R. Caldwell, Ten Ways States Can Combat OceanAcidification (and Why They Should), 37 HARV. ENVTL. L. REV. 57 (2013).

Kiss, Alexandre, State Responsibility and Liability for Nuclear Damage, 35 DENV. J.INT’L L. & POL’Y 67 (2006).

Knox, John H., Assessing the Candidates for a Global Treaty on TransboundaryEnvironmental Impact Assessment, 12 N.Y.U. ENVTL. L.J. 153 (2003).

Knox, John H., The Myth and Reality of Transboundary Environmental ImpactAssessment, 96 AM. J. INT’L L. 291 (2002).

Mank, Bradford, Can Plaintiffs Use Multinational Environmental Treaties as Custom-ary International Law to Sue Under the Alien Tort Statute?, 2007 UTAH L. REV.1085.

Mégret, Frédéric, The Problem of an International Criminal Law of the Environment,36 COLUM. J. ENVTL. L. 195 (2011).

McIntyre, Owen, The Role of Customary Rules and Principles of InternationalEnvironmental Law in the Protection of Shared International Freshwater Re-sources, 46 NAT. RESOURCES J. 157 (2006).

Okawa, Phoebe N., State Responsibility for Transboundary Air Pollution in Interna-tional Law (New York: Oxford Univ. Press, 2000).

Parrish, Austen L., Trail Smelter Deja Vu: Extraterritoriality, International Environ-mental Law, and the Search for Solutions to Canadian-U.S. Transboundary WaterPollution Disputes, 85 B.U. L. REV. 363 (2005).

Percival, Robert V., Liability for Environmental Harm and Emerging Global Environ-mental Law, 25 MD. J. INT’L L. 37 (2010).

Pratt, Laura A.W., Decreasing Dirty Dumping? A Reevaluation of Toxic WasteColonialism and the Global Management of Transboundary Hazardous Waste, 35WM. & MARY ENVTL. L. & POL’Y REV. 581 (2011).

Robinson-Dorn, Michael J., The Trail Smelter: Is What’s Past Prologue? EPA BlazesNew Trail for CERCLA, 14 N.Y.U. ENVTL. L.J. 233 (2006).

Sachs, Noah, Beyond the Liability Wall: Strengthening Tort Remedies in InternationalEnvironmental Law, 55 U.C.L.A. L. REV. 837 (2008).

Waugh, Theodore, Where Do We Go from Here: Legal Controls and Future Strategiesfor Addressing the Transportation of Hazardous Waste Across InternationalBorders, 11 FORDHAM ENVTL. L.J. 477 (2000).

Chapter 4: Climate Change and Protection of the Atmosphere

Abate, Randall S., Massachusetts v. EPA and the Future of Environmental Standing inClimate Change Litigation and Beyond, 33 WM. & MARY ENVTL. L. & POL’Y

REV. 121 (2008).

Attapattu, Sumudu, Global Climate Change: Can Human Rights (and Human Beings)Survive This Onslaught?, 20 COLO. J. INT’L ENVTL. L. & POL’Y 35 (2008).

Bancal, Jean-Charles, The “Financial Mechanism” & “Flexible Mechanisms” of theUnited Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change: Faced with ClimateChange, the Global Environment Facility and the Carbon Market Take LeadingRoles, 3 APPALACHIAN NAT. RESOURCES L.J. 1 (2009).


viii

Black, Elizabeth C., Climate Change Adaptation: Local Solutions for a GlobalProblem, 22 GEO. INT’L ENVTL. L. REV. 359 (2010).

Boyd, William, Climate Change, Fragmentation, and the Challenges of GlobalEnvironmental Law: Elements of a Post-Copenhagen Assemblage, 32 U. PA. J.INT’L L. 457 (2010).

Burleson, Elizabeth, Climate Change Consensus: Emerging International Law, 34 WM.& MARY ENVTL. L. & POL’Y REV. 543 (2010).

Butti, Luciano, The Tortious Road to Liability: A Critical Survey on Climate ChangeLitigation in Europe and North America, 11 SUSTAINABLE DEV. L. & POL’Y 32(2011).

Christopher, Caleb W., Success by a Thousand Cuts: The Use of Environmental ImpactAssessment in Addressing Climate Change, 9 VT. J. ENVTL. L. 549 (2008).

Carlarne, Cinnamon, Climate Change Policies an Ocean Apart: E.U. and U.S. ClimateChange Policies Compared, 14 PENN ST. ENVTL. L. REV. 435 (2006).

Cole, Daniel H., Climate Change, Adaptation, and Development, 26 U.C.L.A. J.ENVTL. L. & POL’Y 1 (2008).

Craig, Robin Kundis, “Stationarity is Dead” — Long Live Transformation: FivePrinciples for Climate Change Adaptation Law, 34 HARV. ENVTL. L. REV. 9(2010).

Dembach, John C. and Seema Kakade, Climate Change Law: An Introduction, 29ENERGY L.J. 1 (2008).

DeSombre, Elizabeth R., The Experience of the Montreal Protocol: ParticularlyRemarkable, and Remarkably Particular, 19 U.C.L.A. J. ENVTL. L. & POL’Y 49(2001).

Doelle, Meinhard, From Hot Air to Action? Climate Change, Compliance and theFuture of International Environmental Law (Toronto: Thomson Carswell, 2005).

Ferrey, Steven, Corporate Responsibility and Carbon-Based Life Forms, 35 B.C.ENVTL. AFF. L. REV. 419 (2008).

Gerrard, Michael B., What the Law and Lawyers Can and Cannot Do About GlobalWarming, 16 SOUTHEASTERN ENVTL. L.J. 33 (2007).

Kysar, Douglas A., Climate Change, Cultural Transformation, and ComprehensiveRationality, 31 B.C. ENVTL. AFF. L. REV. 555 (2004).

McGee, Jr., Henry W., Litigating Global Warming: Substantive Law in Search of aForum, 16 FORDHAM ENVTL. L. REV. 371 (2005).

Osofsky, Hari M., Climate Change Litigation as Pluralist Legal Dialogue?, 26A STAN.ENVTL. L. REV. 181 (2007).

Osofsky, Hari M., Is Climate Change “International”? Litigation’s Diagonal Regula-tory Role, 49 VA. J. INT’L L. 585 (2009).

Osofsky, Hari M., The Future of Environmental Law and Complexities of Scale:Federalism Experiments with Climate Change Under the Clean Air Act, 32 WASH.U. J. L. & POL’Y 79 (2010).

Osofsky, Hari M., The Geography of Climate Change Litigation: Implications forTransnational Regulatory Governance, 83 WASH. U. L. Q. 1789 (2005).

Owen, Dave Climate Change and Environmental Assessment Law, 33 COLUM. J.ENVTL. L. 57 (2008).


ix

Peloso, Chris, Crafting an International Climate Change Protocol: Applying theLessons Learned from the Success of the Montreal Protocol and the OzoneDepletion Problem, 25 J. LAND USE & ENVTL. L. 305 (2010).

Ruhl, J.B., Climate Change Adaptation and the Structural Transformation of Environ-mental Law, 40 ENVTL. L. 363 (2010).

Stewart, Richard B., Michael Oppenheimer, and Bryce Rudyk, Building Blocks forGlobal Climate Protection, 32 STAN. ENVTL. L.J. 341 (2013).

van Asselt, Harro and Joyeeta Gupta, Stretching Too Far? Developing Countries andthe Role of Flexibility Mechanisms Beyond Kyoto, 28 STAN. ENVTL. L.J. 311(2009).

Vandenbergh, Michael P. and Mark A. Cohen, Climate Change Governance: Bound-aries and Leakage, 18 N.Y.U. ENVTL. L.J. 221 (2010).

Wiener, Jonathan B., Something Borrowed for Something Blue: Legal Transplants andthe Evolution of Global Environmental Law, 27 ECOLOGY L. Q. 1295 (2001).

Chapter 5: Environment, International Trade and Investment

Barrett, Jr., John A., The Global Environment and Free Trade: A Vexing Problem anda Taxing Solution, 76 IND. L.J. 829 (2001).

Burleson, Elizabeth, From Fragmentation to Innovation Coordination, 24 GEO. INT’L

ENVTL. L. REV. 477 (2012).

Burleson, Elizabeth and Winslow Burleson, Innovation Cooperation: Energy Biosci-ences and Law, 2011 U. ILL. L. REV. 651 (2011).

Carlarne, Cinnamon, The Kyoto Protocol and the WTO: Reconciling Tensions BetweenFree Trade and Environmental Objectives, 17 COLO. J. INT’L ENVTL. L. & POL’Y

45 (2006).

Chang, Howard F., Toward a Greener GATT: Environmental Trade Measures and theShrimp-Turtle Case, 74 S. CAL. L. REV. 31 (2000).

Driesen, David M., What is Free Trade?: The Real Issue Lurking Behind the FreeTrade and Environment Debate, 41 VA. J. INT’L L. 279 (2001).

Endres, Jody M., Clearing the Air: The Meta-Standard Approach to Ensuring BiofuelsEnvironmental and Social Sustainability, 28 VA. ENVTL. L.J. 73 (2010).

Frischmann, Brett, A Dynamic Institutional Theory of International Law, 51 BUFF. L.REV 679 (2003).

Gaines, Sanford, The WTO’s Reading of the GATT Article XX Chapeau: A DisguisedRestriction on Environmental Measures, 22 U. PA. J. INT’L ECON. L. 739 (2001).

Ghei, Nita, Evaluating the WTO’s Two Step Test for Environmental Measures UnderArticle XX, 18 COLO. J. INT’L ENVTL. L. & POL’Y 117 (2007).

Gonzalez, Carmen G., Genetically Modified Organisms and Justice: The InternationalEnvironmental Justice Implications of Biotechnology, 19 GEO. INT’L ENVTL. L.REV. 583 (2007).

Goyal, Anupam, The WTO and International Environmental Law: Towards Concilia-tion (New Delhi: Oxford Univ. Press, 2006).

Grosko, Brett, Genetic Engineering and International Law: Conflict or Harmony? AnAnalysis of the Biosafety Protocol, GATT, and the WTO Sanitary and Phytosani-tary Agreement, 20 VA. ENVTL. L.J. 295 (2001).

Howse, Robert, The Appellate Body Rulings in the Shrimp/Turtle Case: A New Legal


x

Baseline for the Trade and Environment Debate, 27 COLUM. J. ENVTL. L. 491(2002).

Kennedy, Kevin C., Why Multilateralism Matters in Resolving Trade-EnvironmentDisputes, 7 WIDENER L. SYMP. J. 31 (2001).

Knox, John H., The Judicial Resolution of Conflicts Between Trade and the Environ-ment, 28 HARV. ENVTL. L. REV. 1 (2004).

Lallas, Peter L., The Role of Process and Participation in the Development of EffectiveInternational Environmental Agreements: A Study of the Global Treaty onPersistent Organic Pollutants (POPs), 19 U.C.L.A. J. ENVTL. L. & POL’Y 83(2001).

Mintz, Joel A., Two Cheers for Global POPs: A Summary and Assessment of theStockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants, 14 GEO. INT’L ENVTL. L.REV. 319 (2001).

Scott, Joanne, International Trade and Environmental Governance: Relating Rules(and Standards) in the EU and the WTO, 15 EUR. J. INT’L L. 307 (2004).

Shaffer, Gregory C., The World Trade Organization Under Challenge: Democracy andthe Law and Politics of the WTO’s Treatment of Trade and Environment Matters,25 HARV. ENVTL. L. REV. 1 (2001).

Silva-Send, Nilmini, Climate Change Disputes at the World Trade Organization:National Energy Policies and International Trade Liability, 4 SAN DIEGO J.CLIMATE & ENERGY L. 195 (2013).

Steinberg, Richard H., ed., The Greening of Trade Law: International Trade Organi-zations and Environmental Issues (Lanham, MD: Rowan & Littlefield Publishers,Inc., 2002).

Stewart, Terence P. and David S. Johanson, A Nexus of Trade and the Environment:The Relationship Between the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety and the SPSAgreement of the World Trade Organization, 14 COLO. J. INT’L ENVTL. L. &POL’Y 1 (2003).

Thomas, Chantal, Should the World Trade Organization Incorporate Legal andEnvironmental Standards?, 61 WASH. & LEE L. REV. 347 (2004).

VanderZwaag, David L., The Precautionary Approach and the International Control ofToxic Chemicals: Beacon of Hope, Sea of Confusion and Dissolution, 33 HOUS. J.INT’L L. 605 (2011).

Vinuales, Jorge E., Legal Techniques for Dealing with Scientific Uncertainty inEnvironmental Law, 43 VAND. J. TRANSNAT’L L. 437 (2010).

Vranes, Erich, Trade and the Environment: Fundamental Issues in International Law,WTO Law, and Legal Theory (New York: Oxford Univ. Press, 2009).

Chapter 6: Freshwater Resources

Baillat, Aline, International Trade in Water Rights: The Next Step (London: IWAPublishing, 2010).

Bernauer, Thomas and Anna Kalbhenn, “The Politics of International FreshwaterResources.” The International Studies Encyclopedia (Washington D.C.: TheInternational Studies Assn., 2010).

Bruch, Carl, ed., Public Participation in the Governance of International FreshwaterResources (Tokyo: United Nations Univ. Press, 2005).


xi

Burchi, Stefano and Kerstin Mechlem, Groundwater in International Law: Compilationof Treaties and Other Legal Instruments (Rome: FAO, 2005).

De Chazournes, Laurence Boisson, Christina Leb, and Mara Tignino, eds., Interna-tional Law and Freshwater: The Multiple Challenges (Northampton, MA: EdwardElgar Publishing, 2013).

Dickson, Barnabas and Jon Hutton, eds., Endangered Species Threatened Convention:The Past, Present and Future of CITES, the Convention on International Trade inEndangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (London: Routledge, 2013).

Dinar, Shlomi, International Water Treaties: Negotiation and Cooperation AlongTransboundary Rivers (New York: Routledge, 2007).

Earle, Anton, Anders Jägerskog, and Joakim Öjendal, eds., Transboundary WaterManagement: Principles and Practice (New York: Earthscan, 2010).

Eckstein, Gabriel, Protecting a Hidden Treasure: The UN International Law Commis-sion and the International Law of Transboundary Ground Water Resources, 5 AM.UNIV. SUSTAINABLE DEV. L. & POL’Y 5 (2005).

Fernandez, Linda, Solving Water Pollution Problems Along the US-Mexico Border, 7ENV’T. & DEV. ECON. 715 (2002).

Fischhendler, Itay, Legal and Institutional Adaptation to Climate Uncertainty: A Studyof International Rivers, 6 WATER POL’Y 281 (2004).

Giordano, Meredith A., Managing the Quality of International Rivers: Global Prin-ciples and Basin Practice, 43 NAT. RESOURCES J. 111 (2003).

Giordano, Meredith A. and Aaron T. Wolf, Sharing Waters: Post-Rio InternationalWater Management, 27 NATURAL RESOURCES FORUM 163 (2003).

Hildering, Antoinette, International Law, Sustainable Development and Water Man-agement (Delft, Netherlands: Eburon, 2004).

Iza, Alejandro, ed., “International Water Governance: Conservation of FreshwaterEcosystems: Volume 1: International Agreements, Compilation and Analysis”(Gland, Switzerland: IUCN 2004).

McCaffrey, Stephen The Contribution of the UN Convention on the Law of theNon-Navigational Uses of International Watercourses, 1.3 INT’L J. OF GLOBAL

ENVT’L. ISSUES 250 (2001).

McCaffrey, Stephen, “The Need for Flexibility in Freshwater Treaty Regimes.” 27 NAT.RESOURCES F. 156 (2003).

McIntryre, Owen, The Role of Customary Rules and Principles of InternationalEnvironmental Law in the Protection of Shared International Freshwater Re-sources, 46 NAT. RESOURCES J. 157 (2006).

Paisley, Richard, Adversaries into Partnerships: International Water Law and theEquitable Sharing of Downstream Benefits,” 3 MELBOURNE J. OF INT’L L. 280(2002).

Parrish, Austen, Trail Smelter Deja Vu: Extraterritoriality, International Environmen-tal Law, and the Search for Solutions to Canada-US Transboundary WaterPollution Disputes, 85 BOSTON U. L. REV. (2005).

Priscoli, Jerome Delli, Managing and Transforming Water Conflicts (New York:Cambridge Univ. Press, 2009).

Weiss, Brown Edith, Laurence Boisson de Chazournes, and Nathalie Bernasconi-


xii

Osterwalder. Fresh Water and International Economic Law (New York: OxfordUniv. Press 2005).

Chapter 7: Protection of the Marine Environment

Alcock, Frank, “UNCLOS, Property Rights, and Effective Fisheries Management.”Managing Institutional Complexity: Regime Interplay and Global EnvironmentalChange. Eds. Sebastian Oberthür and Olav Schram Stokke (Cambridge, MA: MITPress, 2011).

Baird, Rachel, Meredith Simons, and Tim Stephens, Ocean Acidification: A Litmus Testfor International Law, 3 CARBON & CLIMATE L. REV. 459 (2009).

Balton, David A. and Holly R. Koehler, Ocean and Fisheries Law: Reviewing theUnited Nations Fish Stocks Treaty, 7 SUSTAINABLE DEV. L. & POL’Y 5 (2006).

Boyle, Alan, Further Development of the Law of the Sea Convention: Mechanisms forChange, 54 INT’L & COMP. L. Q. 563 (2005).

Chung, Suh-Yong, Is the Convention-Protocol Approach Appropriate for AddressingRegional Marine Pollution?: The Barcelona Convention System Revisited, 13PENN ST. ENVTL. L. REV. 85 (2004).

Crothers, G.T. and Lindie Nelson, High Seas Fisheries Governance: A Framework forthe Future?, MARINE RESOURCE ECON. 21.4 (2006): 341.

Cullis-Suzuki, Sarika and Daniel Pauly, Failing the High Seas: A Global Evaluation ofRegional Fisheries Management Organizations, 34 MARINE POL’Y 1036 (2010).

Davies, Andrew J., J. Murray Roberts, and Jason Hall-Spencer, Preserving Deep-SeaNatural Heritage: Emerging Issues in Offshore Conservation and Management,138 BIOLOGICAL CONSERVATION 299 (2007).

Jacobsson, Mans, The International Liability and Compensation Regime for OilPollution from Ships — International Solutions for a Global Problem, 32 TULANE

MAR. L.J. 1 (2007).

Kaye, Stuart, Implementing High Seas Biodiversity Conservation: Global GeopoliticalConsiderations, 28 MARINE POL’Y 221 (2004).

Klein, Natalie S., Dispute Settlement in the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (NewYork: Cambridge Univ. Press, 2005).

Knudsen, Olav F. and Björn Hassler, IMO Legislation and Its Implementation: AccidentRisk, Vessel Deficiencies and National Administrative Practices, 35 MARINE

POL’Y 201 (2011).

Nelson, L.D.M., The Settlement of Disputes Arising from Conflicting Outer ContinentalShelf Claims, 24 INT’L J. OF MARINE & COASTAL L. 409 (2009).

Rothwell, Donald and Tim Stephens, The International Law of the Sea (Oxford: HartPublishing, 2010).

Schoenbaum, Thomas J., Liability for Damages in Oil Spill Accidents: Evaluating theUSA and International Law Regimes in the Light of Deepwater Horizon, 24 J. OF

ENVT’L. L. 395 (2012).

Schoenbaum, Thomas J., The Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill in the Context of the PublicInternational Law Regimes for the Protection of the Marine Environment: AComparative Study, 25 U.S.F. MAR. L.J. 25 1 (2012).

Sumaila, Ussif Rashid, et al., Potential Costs and Benefits of Marine Reserves in theHigh Seas, 345 MARINE ECOLOGY PROGRESS SERIES 305 (2007).


xiii

Tan, Alan Khee-Jin, Vessel-Source Marine Pollution: the Law and Politics ofInternational Regulation. New York: Cambridge Univ. Press, 2006.

Wang, Hanling, Ecosystem Management and Its Application to Large Marine Ecosys-tems: Science, Law, and Politics, 35 OCEAN DEV. & INT’L L. 41 (2004).

Warner, Robin, Protecting the Oceans Beyond National Jurisdiction: Strengthening theInternational Law Framework. Vol. 3. Leiden, Netherlands: Brill, 2009.

Chapter 8: Protection of Biological Diversity

Abensperg-Traun, Max, CITES, Sustainable Use of Wild Species and Incentive-DrivenConservation in Developing Countries, with an Emphasis on Southern Africa, 142BIOLOGICAL CONSERVATION 948 (2009).

Chivian, Eric, and Aaron Bernstein, eds., Sustaining Life: How Human Health Dependson Biodiversity (New York: Oxford Univ. Press, 2008).

Dickson, Barnabas, International Conservation Treaties, Poverty and Development:The Case of CITES, 74 NAT. RESOURCE PERSPECTIVES 1 (2002).

Gehring, Thomas and Eva Ruffing, When Arguments Prevail over Power: The CITESProcedure for the Listing of Endangered Species, 8 GLOBAL ENVTL. POL. 123(2008).

Greiber, Thomas, et al. An Explanatory Guide to the Nagoya Protocol on Access andBenefit-Sharing (Gland, Switzerland: IUCN, 2012).

Joseph, Reji International Regime on Access and Benefit Sharing: Where are We Now?,12 ASIAN BIOTECHNOLOGY & DEV. REV. 77 (2010).

Kamau, Evanson, Bevis Fedder, and Gerd Winter, The Nagoya Protocol on Access toGenetic Resources and Benefit Sharing: What Is New and What Are theImplications for Provider and User Countries and the Scientific Community?, 6 L.& DEV. J. 248 (2010).

Kamau, Evanson C., and Gerd Winter, eds., Genetic Resources, Traditional Knowledgeand the Law: Solutions for Access and Benefit Sharing (London: Earthscan, 2009).

Laikre, Linda, et al, Neglect of Genetic Diversity in Implementation of the Conventionon Biological Diversity, 24 CONSERVATION BIOLOGY 86 (2010).

Lenzen, M., et al, International Trade Drives Biodiversity Threats in DevelopingNations, 486 NATURE 109 (2012).

Loreau, Michel, et al., Diversity Without Representation, 442 NATURE 245 (2006).

McManis, Charles, Biodiversity and the Law: Intellectual Property, Biotechnology andTraditional Knowledge (London: Earthscan, 2012).

Naeem, Shahid, J. Emmett Duffy, and Erika Zavaleta, The Functions of BiologicalDiversity in an Age of Extinction, 336 SCI. 1401 (2012).

Nagle, John, The Effectiveness of Biodiversity Law, 24 J. OF LAND USE AND ENVTL. L.203 (2009).

Najam, Adil, “Negotiating Desertification.” Governing Global Desertification: LinkingEnvironmental Degradation, Poverty and Participation (Aldershot, UK: Ashgate,2006).

Nasi, R., et al., CBD Technical Series No. 33: Conservation and Use of Wildlife-BasedResources: the Bushmeat Crisis (Montreal: Secretariat of the Convention onBiological Diversity, 2008).

Phelps, Jacob, et al., Boosting CITES, 330 SCI. 1752 (2010).


xiv

Reeve, Rosalind, Wildlife Trade, Sanctions and Compliance: Lessons from the CITESRegime, 82 INT’L AFFAIRS 881 (2006).

Sajeva, Maurizio, et al., Regulating Internet Trade in CITES Species, 27 CONSERVA-TION BIOLOGY 429 (2013).

Sand, Peter H., Japan’s ‘Research Whaling’ in the Antarctic Southern Ocean and theNorth Pacific Ocean in the Face of the Endangered Species Convention (CITES),REV. OF EUROPEAN COMMUNITY & INT’L ENVTL. L. 17.1 (2008): 56–71.

Stringer, Lindsay, Can the UN Convention to Combat Desertification Guide Sustain-able Use of the World’s Soils?, 6 FRONTIERS IN ECOLOGY & THE ENV’T 138(2008).

Sutherland, W.J., et al., One Hundred Questions of Importance to the Conservation ofGlobal Biological Diversity, 23 CONSERVATION BIOLOGY 557 (2009).

Chapter 9: Polar Regions

Baird, Rachel, CCAMLR Initiatives to Counter Flag State Non-Enforcement inSouthern Ocean Fisheries, 36 VICTORIA U. OF WELLINGTON L. REV. 733 (2005).

Bargagli, R., Environmental Contamination in Antarctic Ecosystems, 400 SCI. OF THE

TOTAL ENV’T 212 (2008).

Bastmeijer, Kees, “A Long Term Strategy for Antarctic Tourism: The Key to DecisionMaking within the Antarctic Treaty System?” Polar Tourism: Human, Environ-mental and Governance Dimensions. Eds. Patrick Maher, Emma Stewart, andMichael Lück (Elmsford, NY: Cognizant Communication Corp., 2011).

Byers, Michael and Suzanne Lalonde, Who Controls the Northwest Passage, 42VANDERBILT J. OF TRANSNAT’L L. 1133 (2009).

Chown, Steven L., et al., Challenges to the Future Conservation of the Antarctic, 337SCI. 158 (2012).

Dodds, Klaus, Governing Antarctica: Contemporary Challenges and the EnduringLegacy of the 1959 Antarctic Treaty, 1 GLOBAL POL’Y 108 (2010).

Fabra, Adriana and Virginia Gascón, The Convention on the Conservation of AntarcticMarine Living Resources (CCAMLR) and the Ecosystem Approach, 23 INT’L J. OF

MARINE & COASTAL L. 567 (2008).

Gascón, Virginia and Rodolfo Werner, CCAMLR and Antarctic Krill: EcosystemManagement Around the Great White Continent, 7 SUSTAINABLE DEV. L. &POL’Y 14 (2006).

Hassan, Daud, Climate Change and the Current Regimes of Arctic Fisheries ResourcesManagement: An Evaluation, 40 J. MAR. L. & COM. 511 (2009).

Herber, Bernard P., Bioprospecting in Antarctica: The Search for a Policy Regime, 42POLAR REC. 139 (2006).

Holmes, Stephanie, Breaking the Ice: Emerging Legal Issues in Arctic Sovereignty, 9CHI. J. INT’L L. 323 (2008).

Jarashow, Mark, Michael B. Runnels, and Tait Svenson, UNCLOS and the Arctic: ThePath of Least Resistance, 30 FORDHAM INT’L L.J.1587 (2006).

Jensen, Oystein, Arctic Shipping Guidelines: Towards a Legal Regime for NavigationSafety and Environmental Protection?, 44 POLAR REC. 107(2008).

Koivurova, Timo, Limits and Possibilities of the Arctic Council in a Rapidly ChangingScene of Arctic Governance, 46 POLAR REC. 146 (2010).


xv

Koivurova, Timo and David Vanderzwaag, The Arctic Council at 10 Years: Retrospectand Prospects, 40 U. OF BRITISH COLUMBIA L. REV. 121 (2007).

Koivurova, Timo, Environmental Protection in the Arctic and Antarctic: Can the PolarRegimes Learn From Each Other?, 33 INT’L J. OF LEGAL INFO. 204 (2005).

Lennon, Erika, A Tale of Two Poles: A Comparative Look at the Legal Regimes in theArctic and the Antarctic, 8 SUSTAINABLE DEV. L. & POL’Y 32 (2007).

Pharand, Donat, The Arctic Waters and the Northwest Passage: A Final Revisit, 38OCEAN DEV. & INT’L L. 3 (2007).

Rayfuse, Rosemary, Protecting Marine Biodiversity in Polar Areas Beyond NationalJurisdiction, 17 REV. OF EUROPEAN COMMUNITY AND INT’L ENVTL. L. 3 (2008).

Rothwell, Donald The Arctic in International Law: Time for a New Regime? (2008)(ANU College of Law Research Paper 08-37).

Young, Oran, R. Arctic in Play: Governance in a Time of Rapid Change, 24 INT’L J.OF MARINE & COASTAL L. 423 (2009).

Chapter 10: The Environmental Responsibility of Non-State Actors

Baughn, C. Christopher and John C. McIntosh, Corporate Social and EnvironmentalResponsibility in Asian Countries and Other Geographical Regions, 14 CORP.SOC. RESP. & ENVTL. MGMT. 189 (2007).

Bernstein, Steven, Legitimacy in Global Environmental Governance, 1 J. OF INT’L L.& INT’L REL. 139 (2004).

Betsill, Michele Merrill and Elizabeth Corell, eds., NGO Diplomacy: The Influence ofNongovernmental Organizations in International Environmental Negotiations(Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press, 2008).

Carrasco, Enrique R. and Alison K. Guernsey, The World Bank’s Inspection Panel:Promoting True Accountability Through Arbitration, 41 CORNELL INT’L L.J. 594(2008).

Cashore, Benjamin, et al., Can Non-State Governance ‘Ratchet Up’ Global Environ-mental Standards? Lessons from the Forest Sector, 16 REV. OF EUROPEAN

COMMUNITY & INT’L ENVTL. L. 158 (2007).

Cashore, Benjamin, Legitimacy and the Privatization of Environmental Governance:How Non — State Market — Driven (NSMD) Governance Systems GainRule-Making Authority, 15 GOVERNANCE 503 (2002).

Clapp, Jennifer, Global Environmental Governance for Corporate Responsibility andAccountability, 5 GLOBAL ENVTL. POL. 23 (2005).

Clark, Dana, Jonathan A. Fox, and Kay Treakle, eds. Demanding Accountability:Civil-Society Claims and the World Bank Inspection Panel (Lanham, MD:Rowman & Littlefield, 2003).

Fisher, Dana R. and Jessica F. Green, Understanding Disenfranchisement: Civil Societyand Developing Countries’ Influence and Participation in Global Governance forSustainable Development, 4(3) GLOBAL ENVTL. POL. 65 (2004).

Gemmill, Barbara, and Abimbola Bamidele-Izu, “The Role of NGOs and Civil Societyin Global Environmental Governance.” Global Environmental Governance: Op-tions & Opportunities. Eds. D. C. Esty and M. H. Ivanova (New Haven, CT: YaleCenter for Environmental Law and Policy, 2002).

Glasbergen, Pieter, Frank Biermann, and Arthur PJ Mol, eds., Partnerships, Gover-


xvi

nance and Sustainable Development: Reflections on Theory and Practice (EdwardElgar Publishing, 2007).

Gutner, Tamar, Explaining the Gaps Between Mandate and Performance: AgencyTheory and World Bank Environmental Reform, 5 GLOBAL ENVTL. POL. 10(2005).

Hale, Thomas, “World Bank Inspection Panel.” The Handbook of TransnationalGovernance: Institutions and Innovations. Eds. Thomas Hale and David Held(Hoboken, NJ: Wiley, 2011).

Heledd Jenkins and Natalia Yakovleva, Corporate Social Responsibility in the MiningIndustry: Exploring Trends in Social and Environmental Disclosure, 14 J. OF

CLEANER PRODUCTION 271 (2006).

Levy, David Laurence, and Peter John Newell, eds., The Business of Global Environ-mental Governance (Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press, 2005).

Melnyk, Steven A. Robert P. Sroufe, and Roger Calantone, Assessing the Impact ofEnvironmental Management Systems on Corporate and Environmental Perfor-mance, 21 J. OF OPERATIONS MGMT. 329 (2003).

Nielson, Daniel L. and Michael J. Tierney, Delegation to International Organizations:Agency Theory and World Bank Environmental Reform, 57 INT’L ORG. 241(2003).

Oldenziel, Joris, Joseph Wilde-Ramsing, and Patricia Feeney, 10 Years on: Assessingthe Contribution of the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises toResponsible Business Conduct (Paris: OECD Watch, 2010).

Prakash, Aseem and Matthew Potoski, Racing to the Bottom? Trade, EnvironmentalGovernance, and ISO 14001 , 50 AM. J. OF POL. SCI. 350 (2006).

Prakash, Aseem and Matthew Potoski, Investing Up: FDI and the Cross-CountryDiffusion of ISO 14001 Management Systems, 51 INT’L STUD. Q. 723 (2007).


xvii

Table of ContentsChapter 1 INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

§ I. INTERNATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL LAW DEFINED . . . . . . . . . . . 1

§ II. THE HISTORY AND DEVELOPMENT OF INTERNATIONALENVIRONMENTAL LAW . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

A. The Beginning: 1972 to 1992 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

Declaration of the United Nations Conference on the Human

Environment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2

Notes and Questions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

The Development of International Environmental Law Between the

Stockholm Conference and the United Nations Conference on

Environment and Development (1992) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10

B. From Rio de Janeiro (1992) to Johannesburg (2002) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15

1. The 1992 United Nations Conference on Environment and

Development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16

United Nations Conference on Environment and Development, The

Global Partnership for Environment and Development: A Guide to

Agenda 21 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17

Notes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20

Problem 1-1 The Movement to “Stop Agenda 21” . . . . . . . . . . . . 22

2. The World Summit on Sustainable Development: Johannesburg,

2002 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24

Notes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28

C. The United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development, 2012: Rio

+20 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29

III. Green economy in the context of sustainable development and povertyeradication . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30

VI. Means of implementation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32


§ III. INTERNATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL GOVERNANCE . . . . . . . . . . 34

United Nations Environment Programme . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39


§ IV. SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45

A. The Science of Ecology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45

B. Science as a Guide to Decisionmaking . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48

C. Science and Technology as Solutions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48

§ V. ENVIRONMENTAL ETHICS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49

Note and Question . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51

§ VI. ENVIRONMENTAL POLITICS AND ECONOMICS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51

xix

A. Theories of Interdependence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51

B. The Problem of Social Costs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53

Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development . . . . . . . 57

Problem 1-2 Choice of Legal Instruments to Combat Carbon

Emissions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63

Notes and Questions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64

Chapter 2 GENERAL INTERNATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL

LAW . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67

§ I. INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67

A. The Contours of International Environmental Law . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67

B. Public International Law . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68

1. Treaties . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68

2. Multilateral Environmental Agreements (MEAs) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70

3. Customary International Law . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71

4. General Principles of Law . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72

5. Case Law . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72

North Sea Continental Shelf Cases (Federal Republic of Germany v.

Denmark) (Federal Republic of Germany v. Netherlands) . . . . . . . 73

Notes and Questions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 84

Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons . . . . . . . . . . . . 87


§ II. “SOFT LAW” . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 95

A. Principles of International Environmental Law . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 98

B. The Rio Declaration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 98

Note: The Legal Status of the Rio Principles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 105

1. The Harm Prevention Principle . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 106

2. Sustainable Development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 107

Case Concerning the Gab�íkovo-Nagymaros Project

(Hungary v. Slovakia) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 108

Notes and Questions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 121

3. The Precautionary Principle . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 123

Case Concerning Pulp Mills on the River Uruguay

(Argentina v. Uruguay) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 124


4. Intergenerational Equity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 132

Oposa v. Fulgencia S. Factoran, Jr. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 133


5. The Environmental Impact Assessment Principle . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 136

Case Concerning Pulp Mills on the River Uruguay

(Argentina v. Uruguay) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 137

Table of Contents

xx


6. The Polluter-Pays Principle . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 144

Vellore Citizens Welfare Forum v. Union of India . . . . . . . . . . . . 145


7. The Duty to Notify . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 148

8. The Duty to Cooperate in Good Faith . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 148

9. The Duty of Public Participation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 149

Question . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 149

§ III. INTERNATIONAL LAW AND DOMESTIC LAW . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 149

State of Missouri v. Holland . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 151

Commonwealth of Australia v. State of Tasmania

(The Tasmanian Dam Case) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 154


§ IV. THE ENFORCEMENT AND EFFECTIVENESS OF INTERNATIONALENVIRONMENTAL LAW . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 158

Syndicat Professionnel Coordination Des Pêcheurs De L’Étang De Berre

Et De La Région v. Électricité De France (EDF) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 160


§ V. COMPLIANCE AND DISPUTE SETTLEMENT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 169

Compliance and Dispute Settlement Provisions in the WTO and in

Multilateral Environmental Agreements The World Trade Organization

Committee on Trade and Environment Note by the WTO and UNEP

Secretariats . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 171


Problem 2-1 Negotiating a Compliance Regime for the Nagoya

Protocol . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 185

Problem 2-2 Stopping Japan From Killing Whales . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 186

Chapter 3 STATE ENVIRONMENTAL RESPONSIBILITY AND

TRANSBOUNDARY HARM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 189

§ I. INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 189

§ II. CASES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 190

A. Border Pollution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 190

Trail Smelter Case (United States v. Canada) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 190

Notes and Questions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 199

A Trail Smelter Update . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 202

United Nations Economic Commission for Europe Background

Document for Workshop on Transboundary Pollution to be Held In

Budapest . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 204

Note on State Environmental Responsibility . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 211

Problem 3-1 Wastewater Pollution Along the Mexican Border . . . . 213

Table of Contents

xxi

Note on Transboundary Pollution Emanating from the United

States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 217

Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 218

B. The Duty to Notify/Warn . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 218

The Corfu Channel Case (United Kingdom v. Albania) . . . . . . . . . 218


Note on the Obligation to Inform, Warn, Consult, and Cooperate with

Respect to Transboundary Environmental Harm . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 222

C. Areas Beyond National Jurisdictions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 223

The Nuclear Tests Case (Australia v. France) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 223

Nuclear Test Case (Australia v. France) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 226


Note on Transboundary Harm Beyond the Limits of National

Jurisdictions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 232

§ III. CODIFICATIONS AND SPECIALIZED TREATY REGIMES . . . . . . . 232

A. Principles of State Responsibility for Environmental Harm . . . . . . . . . 233

Problem 3-2 The Chernobyl Nuclear Reactor Incident . . . . . . . . . . 233

Note on the Duty to Notify and Assist in Case of a Nuclear

Accident . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 237

B. Specialized International Agreements Providing for Liability for

Transboundary Environmental Harm . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 237

Question . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 238

§ IV. ENVIRONMENT IMPACT ASSESSMENT IN A TRANSBOUNDARYCONTEXT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 238

Problem 3-3 Building a Nuclear Power Plant on the Austrian Border . 238

Convention on Environmental Impact Assessment in a Transboundary

Context . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 239


Chapter 4 PROTECTION OF THE ATMOSPHERE AND THE

CLIMATE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 253

§ I. INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 253


§ II. LONG RANGE TRANSBOUNDARY POLLUTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 258

Problem 4-1 Creating a Regime to Combat Long-Range Transboundary

Air Pollution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 259

A. North America . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 259

Marilynn K. Roberts, Acid Rain Regulation: Federal Failure and

State Success . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 259

Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Ontario v. U.S. Environmental

Protection Agency . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 263

Table of Contents

xxii

Note on the Control of International and Interstate Pollution Under the

Clean Air Act . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 265

Canada-United States Agreement on Air Quality . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 265

Note on Trading SO2 Allowances . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 275

Joint Statement Marking the 20th Anniversary of the US-Canada Air

Quality Agreement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 276

B. Europe . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 277

The Convention on Long-Range Transboundary Air Pollution

(1979) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 277

Comparison of the European and U.S. Approaches Towards

Acidification, Eutrophication and Ground Level Ozone . . . . . . . . . 278


C. Other Regions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 287

Note on Asian Smog . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 287

ASEAN Agreement on Transboundary Haze Pollution (2002) . . . . . 288

Note and Question . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 290

§ III. PROTECTING THE OZONE LAYER . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 290

A. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 290

B. The Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer

(1987) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 293

The Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone

Layer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 297

C. Major Elements of the Ozone Regime . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 307

1. The Multilateral Fund . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 307

The Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone

Layer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 307

Questions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 309

2. Assessment Panels . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 309

United Nations Environment Programme Ozone Secretariat . . . . 309

3. The Non-Compliance Procedure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 310

Non-Compliance Procedure (1998) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 310

Questions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 313

4. Critical Use and Essential Use Exemptions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 313

Problem 4-2 A Critical Use Exemption (CUE) for Methyl

Bromide . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 318

Problem 4-3 Controlled Substances in Air-Conditioning and

Refrigeration Appliances . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 326

Problem 4-4 Using the Montreal Protocol to Fight Climate

Change . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 328

Note and Questions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 331

D. Evaluating the Montreal Protocol . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 331

Table of Contents

xxiii

Ozone Action . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 332

§ IV. CLIMATE CHANGE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 336

A. Our Changing Climate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 336

The Fifth Climate Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel

on Climate Change, 2013–2014 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 337

IPCC Working Group I: Contribution to the IPCC Fifth Assessment

Report, Climate Change 2013, the Physical Science Basis . . . . . . . 338

IPCC Press Release . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 339


B. Causes of Climate Change . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 347

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Fourth Assessment

Report, Climate Change, Summary for Policy Makers . . . . . . . . . . 352

C. Sources of Emissions of Greenhouse Gases . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 355

1. Global emissions by gas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 355

2. Global emissions by source . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 356

3. Global emissions by country . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 356

Note . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 357

Note on us Greenhouse Gas Emissions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 357

D. Future Emissions Scenarios, Future Climate Projections, and Potential

Impacts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 358

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Fifth Assessment

Report, Climate Change, Summary for Policymakers . . . . . . . . . . . 358

Note on Potential Impacts of Climate Change . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 359

The Role of Lawyers Advising Clients on Climate Change . . . . . . . 364

E. Options for Dealing with Climate Change: Adaptation and Mitigation . 365

1. Adaptation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 365

Problem 4-5 Formulating a Climate Change Adaptation Plan for the

United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 367

2. Mitigation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 367

(a) Abatement Strategies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 368

(b) Sequestration Strategies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 370

3. Cost of Mitigation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 371

4. Case Study: The European Union Emissions Trading Scheme . . . . . 372

The European Commission, the EU Emissions Trading Scheme . . 373


Note on the Application of the EU-ETS to International Aviation . 380

Evaluating the European Union’s Emissions Trading Scheme . . . 381

F. The Ethics of Climate Change and the Divide Between the Developed

and Developing World . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 382

Doha Conference of the Parties to the UNFCCC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 383


Table of Contents

xxiv

G. The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change

(UNFCCC) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 385

H. The Kyoto Protocol . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 388

Problem 4-6 How to Determine a Kyoto Protocol Party’s “Assigned

Amount Units” . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 392

Problem 4-7 Taking Advantage of the Sink Provisions of the Kyoto

Protocol . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 393

Problem 4-8 Options for Complying with the Kyoto Protocol . . . . . 397

I. Compliance with the Kyoto Protocol . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 397

An Introduction to the Kyoto Protocol Compliance Mechanism . . . . 397

Background Paper on Information on Trends in Relation to the

Commitments Under Article 3, Paragraph 1, of the Kyoto Protocol

Found in Reports of the In-Depth Reviews of the Fifth National

Communications of Parties Included in Annex I . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 400


Evaluating the Kyoto Protocol . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 402

J. The Copenhagen Accord: A New Approach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 403

The Copenhagen Accord . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 404

Summary of Main Points of the Copenhagen Accord . . . . . . . . . . . 407

Response to the Copenhagen Accord . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 408


K. Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation

(REDD) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 414

1. The Development and Elements of REDD-Plus . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 415

Outcome of the Ad Hoc Working Group on Long-Term Cooperative

Action Under the Convention . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 415

Outcome of the Work of the Ad Hoc Working Group on Long-Term

Cooperative Action Under the Convention . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 418


2. Institutions and Demonstration Projects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 420

3. Where Will the Money Come from? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 422

(a) Non-market based financing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 422

(b) Market-based financing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 422

Problem 4-9 A Law Student Contemplates Investing in the

Voluntary Carbon Markets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 424

Problem 4-10 Promoting Redd-Plus in Indonesia . . . . . . . . . . . 424

L. The United States’ Implementation of Its Copenhagen Pledge . . . . . . . 425

Massachusetts v. Environmental Protection Agency . . . . . . . . . . . 426

Note . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 436

1. The President’s Climate Action Plan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 437

The President’s Climate Action Plan Executive Offıce of the

Table of Contents

xxv

President . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 437

2. Action by the States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 443

3. Additional Climate Change Legal Tools . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 444

M. The Doha Gateway: The Second Commitment Period of the Kyoto

Protocol . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 445


N. Summary: The Future . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 448

Problem 4-11 The Paris 2015 Conference of the Parties (COP 21):

Drafting a Fair and Balanced, Binding Agreement for the Third

Commitment Period, a Class Simulation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 449

Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, The

Council, The European Economic and Social Committee and the

Committee of the Regions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 451

Chapter 5 ENVIRONMENT, TRADE, AND INVESTMENT . . . . . . 455

§ I. INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 455

Environmentalist Trade Demands: A Critical Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . 459

The Environmental Impact of Trade . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 460


§ II. THE INSTITUTIONS AND CORE PRINCIPLES OF INTERNATIONALTRADE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 462

General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 465


United States — Standards for Reformulated and Conventional

Gasoline . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 467


§ III. WILDLIFE, NATURAL RESOURCES, AND POLLUTION . . . . . . . . . 476

Problem 5-1 Amazonia Seeks Global Environmental Reforms . . . . . . 476

The Tuna Dolphin Cases: A False Start . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 477

United States — Import Prohibition of Certain Shrimp and

Shrimp Products . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 478

United States — Import Prohibition of Certain Shrimp and

Shrimp Products Recourse to Article 21.5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 489

China — Measures Related to the Exportation of Various

Raw Materials . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 494


Note on the WTO and Trade in Natural Resources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 504

§ IV. MULTILATERAL ENVIRONMENTAL AGREEMENTS AND THETRADE LAWS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 506

United Nations Environment Programme Trade-Related Measures in

Multilateral Trade Agreements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 506

Table of Contents

xxvi


§ V. CLIMATE CHANGE, RENEWABLE ENERGY, AND GREENTECHNOLOGY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 528

A. Price and Market Mechanisms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 529

Trade and Climate Change a Report by the United Nations

Environmental Programme and the World Trade Organization . . . . 530


Annex I Illustrative List of Export Subsidies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 535

Annex II Guidelines on Consumption of Inputs in the Production

Process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 536

B. Financial Mechanisms to Promote Renewable Energy and Green

Technology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 537

Trade and Climate Change: A Report by the United Nations


Canada — Certain Measures Affecting Renewable Energy Generation

Sector/Canada — Measures Relating to the Feed-in Tariff Program

Report of the Panel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 540


C. Technical Requirements to Promote the Use of Climate Friendly Products

and Green Technology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 555

Trade and Climate Change: A Report by the United Nations



Problem 5-2 State Z Adopts Technical Regulations Mandating Energy

Efficient Products . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 565

Problem 5-3 State Y Adopts Comprehensive Energy Labeling

Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 566

§ VI. HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES AND WASTES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 566

A. Hazardous Products and the Multilateral Trading System . . . . . . . . . . 567

European Communities — Measures Affecting Asbestos and Asbestos-

Containing Products Report of the Appellate Body . . . . . . . . . . . . . 567


B. Hazardous Chemicals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 581

1. The Rotterdam Convention . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 581

2. The Stockholm Convention . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 582


Problem 5-4 State B Enacts A Ban and Restrictions on the Export

of Certain Chemicals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 583

C. Hazardous Waste Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 583

1. The Basel Convention . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 583

2. The Ban Amendment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 585

3. Liability for Damages . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 585

Table of Contents

xxvii

4. Regional and Bilateral Agreements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 586

5. Waste Prevention, Minimization, and Recovery . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 586

6. Compliance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 587

Problem 5-5 State A Seeks a Profit from Disposing of Hazardous

Wastes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 587

Compliance Mechanism of the Basel Convention . . . . . . . . . . . . 587

Problem 5-6 State M Seeks to Vindicate its Right to Free Trade in

Hazardous Wastes Under the WTO Agreements . . . . . . . . . . . . . 591


Brazil-Measures Affecting Imports of Retreaded Tyres Report of the

Appellate Body . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 594


D. Nuclear and Radioactive Substances . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 603

International Atomic Energy Agency, Code of Practice on the

International Transboundary Movement of Radioactive Waste . . . . 605


Note on Liability for Nuclear Damage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 607

§ VII. FOOD SAFETY, BIOTECHNOLOGY, AND ENVIRONMENTALPROTECTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 609

Problem 5-7 State A Takes Action to Protect Human Health and

Ecosystems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 609

A. National Regulation of Food Safety . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 610

B. Criteria Governing International Trade in Food and Associated

Products . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 613

World Trade Organization Agreement on the Application of Sanitary

and Phytosanitary Measures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 613

European Communities Measures Concerning Meat and Meat

Products (Hormones) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 615


Note on Labeling GM Foods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 640

§ VIII. INTERNATIONAL INVESTMENT LAW AND THEENVIRONMENT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 644

Metalclad Corporation v. The United Mexican States . . . . . . . . . . . . 644


Chapter 6 FRESHWATER RESOURCES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 657

§ I. INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 657

§ II. WATER AS A HUMAN RIGHT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 658

International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights . . . . 658

General Comment No. 15 (2002), Committee on Economic, Social and

Cultural Rights . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 659

Table of Contents

xxviii

Plan of Implementation of the World Summit on Sustainable

Development, Report of the World Summit on Sustainable

Development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 664


§ III. SHARED WATER RESOURCES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 665

A. International Law Rules on Shared Watercourses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 665

1. Cases . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 665

Affaire Du Lac Lanoux (France v. Spain) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 667

Case Concerning the Gab�ikovo-Nagymaros Project (Hungary v.

Slovakia) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 678

Case Concerning Pulp Mills on the River Uruguay Argentina v.

Uruguay . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 685


2. Codifications of International Shared Watercourses Law . . . . . . . . . 693

Problem 6-1 Turkey, Syria, and Iraq Spar over the Tigris and

Euphrates Rivers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 696

Colorado v. New Mexico (“Vermejo I”) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 699

Colorado v. New Mexico (“Vermejo II”) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 704


Note on Dams and Development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 714

World Commission on Dams . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 714

3. The United States-Mexico Water Sharing Agreement . . . . . . . . . . . 717

a. The 1944 Agreement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 717

b. The Salinity Crisis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 719

Permanent and Definitive Solution to the International Problem

of the Salinity of the Colorado River (English Text of Minute

242) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 720

c. Mexico’s Water Debt . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 723

United States Allocation of Rio Grande Waters During the Last

Year of the Current Cycle (English Text of Minute 308) . . . . . . 723

d. Environmental Flows for the Colorado River Delta . . . . . . . . . . . 727

Interim International Cooperative Measures in the Colorado River

Basin Through 2017 and Extension of Minute 318 Cooperative

Measures to Address the Continued Effects of the April 2010

Earthquake in the Mexicali Valley, Baja California

(Minute 319) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 728

e. Evaluating the 1944 Treaty Regime . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 746

B. Transboundary Groundwater . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 746

United Nations Economic Commission for Europe Draft Model

Provisions on Transboundary Aquifers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 747


Table of Contents

xxix

Problem 6-2 The Santa Cruz and the San Pedro Watersheds Between

the United States and Mexico . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 750

United States-Mexico Tranboundary Aquifer Assessment Act . . . . . 751

Questions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 753

§ IV. WATER TRADE AND INTERBASIN WATER TRANSFERS . . . . . . . 754

Export of Bulk Water From Newfoundland and Labrador Report of the

Ministerial Commitiee Examining the Export of Bulk Water . . . . . . . . 756


Chapter 7 PROTECTION OF THE MARINE ENVIRONMENT . . . 765

§ I. THE MARINE ENVIRONMENT AND THE LAW OF THE SEA . . . . . 765

A. The UNCLOS “Constitution” for the Law of the Sea . . . . . . . . . . . . . 765

B. The Status of UNCLOS in United States Law . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 770

Questions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 771

C. UNCLOS Part XII: Protection and Preservation of the Marine

Environment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 771

D. Dispute Settlement Under UNCLOS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 773

Problem 7-1 A Dispute Between Neighboring States Over Marine

Pollution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 776

Problem 7-2 A Dispute Between Neighboring States Over Fishing . 776

§ II. THE PRINCIPAL INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS INVOLVEDIN PROTECTING THE MARINE ENVIRONMENT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 776

A. The International Maritime Organization (IMO) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 777

Note on the Work and Workings of the International Maritime

Organization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 779

Problem 7-3 Adopting A New IMO Standard . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 780

B. The United Nations Environment Program (UNEP) and the Regional

Seas Programmes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 781

Note . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 783

§ III. LAND-BASED MARINE POLLUTION AND INTERNATIONALLAW . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 784

On the Prevention and Elimination of Pollution from Land-Based

Sources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 787

The Mox Plant Case (Ireland v. United Kingdom) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 789


Problem 7-4 Non-Point Pollution in the South China Sea . . . . . . . . . . 796


§ IV. PROTECTION OF THE ENVIRONMENT OF THE “AREA” . . . . . . . . 800

Problem 7-5 Mining the Riches of the Sea . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 804

Content of the Environmental Impact Statement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 806

Note . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 816

Table of Contents

xxx

Responsibilities and Obligations of States Sponsoring Persons and

Entities With Respect to Activities in the Area . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 816


§ V. OPERATIONAL SHIP POLLUTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 834

Annex I: Prevention of Pollution By Oil . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 834

Annex II: Control of Pollution by Noxious Liquid Substances . . . . . . . 836

Annex III: Prevention of Pollution by Harmful Substances in Packaged

Form . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 837

Annex IV: Prevention of Pollution by Sewage from Ships . . . . . . . . . . 837

Annex V: Prevention of Pollution by Garbage From Ships . . . . . . . . . 837

Annex VI: Prevention of Air Pollution from Ships . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 837

International Maritime Organization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 838

United States Environmental Protection Agency Offıce of Transportation

and Air Quality, International Maritime Organization Adopts Program to

Control Air Emissions from Oceangoing Vessels (OGVS) . . . . . . . . . 842

Problem 7-6 Enforcing Marpol Ship Pollution Standards . . . . . . . . . . 845

Note . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 845

United States v. Peña . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 846


§ VI. OCEAN DUMPING . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 860

1996 Protocol to the Convention on the Prevention of Marine Pollution

by Dumping of Wastes and Other Matter, 1972 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 861


Problem 7-7 Storing Carbon Dioxide Under the Seabed to Combat

Climate Change . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 865

§ VII. MARINE CASUALTIES AND LIABILITY FOR DAMAGES . . . . . . . 866

Problem 7-8 An International Oil Tanker Casualty . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 867

International Convention on Civil Liability for Oil Pollution Damage

(CLC) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 870

International Convention on the Establishment of an International Fund

for Compensation for oil Pollution Damage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 872


Note on Collateral Actions to Overcome Limits under the International

Liability Regimes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 877

In Re Oil Spill by the Oil Rig Deepwater Horizon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 886

Note . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 899


Notes on Natural Resource Damages . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 903

§ VIII. MARINE FISHERIES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 907

A. Fishery Resources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 907

B. UNCLOS Provisions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 908

Table of Contents

xxxi

C. National Fisheries Management Systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 909

Problem 7-9 Fishery Mismanagement in the Exclusive Economic

Zone . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 911

D. High Seas Fisheries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 912

1. UNCLOS provisions and Supplemental Fisheries Agreements . . . . . 912

Note on International Agreements Governing Driftnet Fishing on

the High Seas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 914

2. Regional Fisheries Management Organizations (RFMOs) . . . . . . . . 916

E. Straddling Fish Stocks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 917

Problem 7-10 The Case of the Estai . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 918

Problem 7-11 The Swordfish Dispute European Union (EU) v. Chile

International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea Dispute No. 7 . . . . . . 919

Problem 7-12 The Case of the Bering Sea Doughnut Hole . . . . . . . 920

Note on the Impact of the 1995 Fish Stocks Agreement on the

Management of Straddling Stocks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 921

Problem 7-13 Managing the Doughnut Hole Agreement . . . . . . . . . 921

F. Highly Migratory Species of Fish. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 923

Southern Blue Fin Tuna Cases New Zealand v. Japan;

Australia v. Japan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 923

Southern Bluefin Tuna Casesnew Zealand v. Japan

Australia v. Japan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 930


§ IX. WHALES AND MARINE MAMMALS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 936

Note on the International Convention for the Regulation of Whaling

(1946) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 937

Institute of Cetacean Research v. Sea Shepherd Conservation Society . 938

Note and Question . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 944

Dispute Concerning Japan’s Jarpa II Program of “Scientific Whaling”

(Australia v. Japan) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 944


Notes on the Outcome of the Jarpa II Whaling Case . . . . . . . . . . . . . 955

§ X. MARINE ECOSYSTEMS, BIODIVERSITY, AND MARINEPROTECTED AREAS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 956

Problem 7-14 Designating Marine Protected Areas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 958

Assembly of the International Maritime Organization Resolution

A.982(24) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 960


Chapter 8 BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 971

§ I. INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 971

A. The Meaning of Biological Diversity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 971

Table of Contents

xxxii

B. Measurement of Biological Diversity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 974


C. The Importance of Biological Diversity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 977


D. Threats to Biological Diversity and Causes of Loss . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 981


§ II. THE UNITED NATIONS CONVENTION ON BIOLOGICALDIVERSITY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 982

A. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 982

Problem 8-1 Analysis of the Uncbd: Should the United States Become

a Party? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 983

B. Conservation of Biological Diversity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 984

Problem 8-2 United States Implementation of a Policy to Conserve

Biodiversity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 985

Australia’s Biodiversity Conservation Strategy Executive Summary . 985

The European Union’s Biological Diversity Strategy, European

Parliament Resolution of 20 April 2012 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 988


Problem 8-3 The Danube Delta Case . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 995

1. A Comprehensive/Integrative (C&I) Strategy to Conserve Biological

Diversity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 997

2. A “Hot Spots” Strategy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 997

3. Strategic Habitat Preservation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 998

C. Access to Genetic Resources and Benefit Sharing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 999

1. The Provisions of the UNCBD . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 999

2. The Nagoya Protocol . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1000

3. Traditional Knowledge . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1001

Problem 8-4 Biotechnology in Brazil . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1001

4. Marine Biodiversity and Genetic Resources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1003

D. Financing the Convention on Biological Diversity’s Work . . . . . . . . 1003

E. Biosafety . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1004

Problem 8-5 The International Grain Trade Coalition Wrestles with

Biosafety . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1006

§ III. PROTECTION OF SPECIES DIVERSITY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1008

A. Treaties to Conserve or Protect Migratory Birds and Other Species . . 1008

B. The Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild

Fauna and Flora (CITES) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1008

1. How CITES Works . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1008

Notes and Questions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1010

2. Sustainable Use Issues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1013

3. Implementation and Enforcement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1014

Problem 8-6 Protecting Elephants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1015

Table of Contents

xxxiii

Problem 8-7 Protecting Polar Bears . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1016

§ IV. PROTECTION OF ECOSYSTEMS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1017

A. Wetlands . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1017

Convention on Wetlands of International Importance Especially as

Waterfowl Habitat . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1018


B. Forests . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1019

C. World Heritage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1021

§ V. COMBATTING DESERTIFICATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1022

A. The Desertification Convention . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1023

B. How Can Desertification Be Prevented or Reversed? . . . . . . . . . . . . 1023

Combatting Desertification and Land Degradation: Proven Practices

from Asia and the Pacific . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1024

C. Implementation of the UNCCD . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1026

United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification . . . . . . . . . 1026

Problem 8-6 Formulating A National Action Plan (NAP) . . . . . . . 1030

Chapter 9 THE POLAR REGIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1031

§ I. ANTARCTICA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1031

A. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1031

1. Geography and Climate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1032

2. Population . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1033

3. Environmental Concerns . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1033

a) Ozone Depletion and Climate Change . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1033

b) A Melting Ice Shelf . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1034

c) Krill . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1034

B. The Antarctic Treaty System: Security, Peace and Preservation of

Sovereign Claims . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1035

1. The Antarctic Treaty . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1035


2. Antarctic Treaty Consultative Parties and Consultative Meetings . . 1038

The Antarctic Treaty . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1038

Notes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1039

Questions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1040

Problem 9-1 Australia Enforces Environmental Restrictions in its

Antarctic Territory . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1041

C. Scientific Research, Environmental Stewardship and Species

Protection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1042


1. Convention for the Conservation of Antarctic Seals . . . . . . . . . . . . 1046

2. Convention on the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources

Table of Contents

xxxiv

(CCAMLR) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1047


Problem 9-2 Management and Enforcement Problems in the

Southern Ocean . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1050

A Proposal for the Ross Sea Region Marine Protection Area

Delegation of the United States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1052

3. Protocol on Environmental Protection (The Madrid Protocol) . . . . . 1055


D. Mineral Resource Regulation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1058


E. Oil Spills and Waste Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1060

Notes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1062

F. Regulation of Tourism . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1063


Problem 9-3 Visiting Antarctica . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1065

§ II. THE ARCTIC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1067

A. Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1067

B. The Arctic Legal Regime . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1069

1. Regulation of Arctic Waters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1070

2. The Ilulissat Declaration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1071

The Ilulissat Declaration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1072

3. The Arctic Environmental Protection Strategy and the Arctic

Council . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1073

The Rovaniemi Declaration on the Protection of the Arctic

Environment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1073

Note on the Arctic Environmental Protection Strategy . . . . . . . . 1075

Questions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1077

C. Arctic Marine Life and Fisheries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1077

1. The Central Arctic Ocean “Doughnut Hole” . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1078

2. The Bering Sea “Doughnut Hole” . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1079


D. The Kiruna Declaration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1081

Kiruna Declaration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1081


Chapter 10 THE ENVIRONMENTAL RESPONSIBILITY OF NON-

STATE ACTORS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1087

§ I. INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1087

A. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1087

B. The Example of the World Bank . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1088

The World Bank Inspection Panel Process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1089

Table of Contents

xxxv

Problem 10-1 The Lake Titicaca (Bolivia) to Puerto Maldonado (Peru)

Highway . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1090

World Bank Inspection Panel, Rondônia Natural Resources

Management Project . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1093

World Bank Inspection Panel, Report on Progress Review of

Implementation of Brazil: Rondônia Natural Resources Management

Project . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1095


C. The Environmental Liability of International Organizations . . . . . . . 1099

§ II. NON-GOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATIONS (NGOs) . . . . . . . . . . . 1100

Question . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1100

Notes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1101

§ III. BUSINESS AND INDUSTRY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1105

A. Codes of Conduct and Environmental Management Systems . . . . . . . 1105

Agenda 21, Report of the United Nations Conference on Environment

and Development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1105

Notes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1106

B. Enforcing Code of Conduct Norms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1111

OECD, Procedural Guidance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1111

Revised Final Statement on Complaint Concerning Oil Multinational

BP Under OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises . . . . . . 1115


C. Environmental Liability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1121

Problem 10-2 A Chemical Plant Explosion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1121

1. Liability under International Law . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1121

2. Liability Under the Home State or Host State Laws . . . . . . . . . . . . 1122

In Re Union Carbide Corp. Gas Plant Disaster . . . . . . . . . . . . 1122

Note on the Bhopal Settlement and its Tortuous Aftermath . . . . 1125


Kiobel v. Royal Dutch Petroleum Company . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1128


Table of Cases . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . TC-1

Index . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I-1

Table of Contents

xxxvi

Documents

INTERNATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL LAW: CASES ...Preface to Second Edition We take pleasure to offer this Casebook on International Environmental Law as a classroom learning tool that can